[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 36 (Friday, March 25, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 25, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                             WELFARE REFORM

  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, today I rise to outline a proposal to 
abolish the Federal welfare system and replace it with a system that 
allows States to move their people into jobs and their families into 
economic security. When we return from the April recess, I will be 
introducing legislation to take the Federal money we currently spend on 
welfare and give it to the States to use for community-based programs 
to connect people to work and to make work pay. Federal payments to 
people who can work, but will not will end.
  Several weeks ago, I made a statement that laid out several 
principles I thought must be included in any welfare reform proposal. I 
would like to go through those principles again and explain how my 
proposal meets each one.
  The first principle is: Washington's welfare system does not work. It 
cannot just be reformed. It must be abolished. It makes no sense--in 
fact, it is cruel--to provide Federal funds only to those mothers who 
agree not to work, not to marry, and not to seek a stable life for 
their children. But that is exactly what our current system does.
  My proposal would end that system--end AFDC and part of the Food 
Stamp Program and replace them with a block grant. The block grant 
would go to States that would use it to move low-income Americans into 
jobs that enable them to support their families.
  The block grant would initially be based on the amount States 
currently receive from AFDC and Food Stamps. Gradually, the money would 
be redistributed based on economic need and on a State's own spending 
on low-income populations.
  The block grant approach sends a simple message: the Federal 
Government ought to get out of the welfare business. We have created a 
system that is too bad to fix. We ought to turn it over--with 
sufficient funds to get the job done--to the States.
  The second principle is: Work is what works; hand-outs do not work. 
Right now, welfare pays people to reject the values of work and family. 
It should be used to bring low-income mothers into the work force.
  My proposal would require States to use their block grant funds to 
move people toward work, but it would give them wide latitude in how 
they choose to do this. In the first year of the program, the Secretary 
of HHS would have to fund any State plan that moved people to work--the 
plan could use job training, earnings supplementation, nutrition 
assistance, education, child care, housing vouchers, public sector 
jobs, tax credits, or any other creative method to connect low-income 
mothers to jobs.
  In future years, States would only have to show they were making 
progress in moving people into jobs to continue receiving block grant 
funds. That progress would be measured by the percentage of program 
participants who get jobs and the number who have moved out of the 
State program because their income increased. More credit would be 
given for moving low-income mothers into jobs.
  Those States whose programs move people into work get full funding 
with no bureaucratic questioning. Those States whose programs do not 
work have to explain to the Secretary of HHS how they will fix their 
plans to make them effective before they get their Federal funds. In 
short, the Federal Government will no longer pay for programs that do 
not have a proven record of moving people into work.

  My proposal turns current welfare incentives upside down. Instead of 
paying people not to work, we will pay States to create an environment 
that moves people into work.
  The third principle is: The answer to the current welfare crisis is 
not inside the beltway--it is inside each of our States. My State of 
Wisconsin is full of ideas and programs for changing welfare to a 
program that moves people to work. Milwaukee's Mayor John Norquist has 
proposed a ``work connection'' system. In Milwaukee, Project New Hope 
is about to expand to 600 former welfare recipients who will be moved 
to jobs using training and earnings supplements. Our Governor is about 
to start a pilot program that limits welfare support 2 years. Kenosha 
County has an innovative program to consolidate current job training 
resources into one center and make sure welfare recipients have access 
to those resources. These are all work-based ideas that could and would 
be funded under my block grant proposal.
  By giving States the flexibility to design their own work-based 
systems, we will provide an incentive for local communities to become 
involved in moving welfare recipients into jobs. We will allow local 
communities to design programs that make sense for local economic 
conditions. We will give our communities the power to do what is right 
and best for the low-income families in their area--and stop paying 
low-income people to do what we all agree is wrong and worst for their 
families.
  We must do more than just reform welfare. We owe it to the low-income 
families of this country to end a program that requires them to stay 
jobless and broken. We owe it to the taxpayers to spend their money in 
a way that strengthens their communities. We owe it to ourselves to be 
honest when we have failed--as we have with our current welfare system. 
And we owe it to this country to develop a welfare system that respects 
and encourages the values of work and family. I believe my proposal 
does all this, and I hope my colleagues will be able to support it when 
it is introduced next month.

                          ____________________